JL Allen

My experience was eerily like that described by Mike. I still recall the way my teacher's eyes widened within her face which had turned ashen when another instructor whispered into her ear what had just occurred. I was several years younger and we heard the news very early on. We were immediately formed into two lines at the classroom door and marched somewhat silently down the highly reflective linoleum floors in which the lights had been dimmed (perhaps to save electricity during classes). I can still hear the clacking of the 2" Cuban heels which many of the boys wore then. I was the reluctant President of my class at that time - running only because of the prodding of friends and an obligation which I felt to my brilliant and exhuberant new national leader who encouraged at every opportunity that we push ourselves harder - accept new challeneges - become more and accomplish more - for our own growth and for the betterment of the country. My teacher held my hand from the classroom and all afternoon until the time to board the busses for home. We were the only two classes to make the trek to the school's only television in the cafeteria and monitor the unfolding tragedy. I remember the announcement that the police had found a British Enfield 303. Then, they discovered the German Mauser in the TSBD. Later, when they "reidentified" the Mauser as the Mannlicher-Carcano - I began to get a very sick feeling about what was transpiring. I had always believed government proclamations without question - but I found this nugget of misinformation to be inexplicable and unforgivable. In a police investigation of a murder - particularly of the leader of the free world - you ascertain specific data - check it - and record it. You don't make guesses about what you think something might be - or, jot down what you think something looks like - then announce to a grieving nation your mistaken and incorrect assumptions as fact. I began to dread the appearances of the Dallas Police representatives who seemed more and more like moronic ghouls - automatons of evil - robots, wound up and set upon a dark course of premeditated results. I also watched Lee Oswald every chance I could, live and on tape, being led through the station corridors. To me, he responded and reacted in every way, like an innocent man caught in the machinery of something deaf and unstoppable. When he was so conveniently murdered in the station basement on Sunday morning - I was changed forever. When the LIFE magazine came to our home in February of 1964 - I immediately thought the photograph was fraudulent. The body was at an extreme angle and seemed stretched-out - legs too long. Neither the face nor the overall body-shape resembled the rather smallish, slight young man I had watched several months earlier - who had - considering the extreme conditions and circumstances - behaved so reservedly and politely.

There is a very interesting, informative and entertaining DVD which came out not too long ago - "JFKII - The Bush Connection". I think it is $9.95. The fine print in the FBI warning at the beginning is funny in that it encourages reproduction, redistribution and even resale - as people will value the information more if they have to pay something for it. It examines many major connections and relationships (some very old) which were going on in the background - from Prescott Bush, forwards - including Skull & Bones, CIA, FBI, Zapata Oil, Bay of Pigs, etc. It's very well done - humorous and enjoyable to watch - with animation by the people from "South Park" (I believe), and a soundtrack which includes Stevie Wonder and Jimmy Wycliff (reggae). It includes an entire seperate presentation on the more peculiar aspects of the 9/11 occurrances, as well. A great addition to any collection!

I only heard the preview for a few moments. I believe they said "archival news footage" and I think it might have multiple segments. I only have CSPAN 1 & 2.

Harry, Likewise, I'm sure... 8^)

"I have posted a clip here that I got off another forum that exposed this claim of yours as also being in error. Both the man in the hat and the woman next to him move in the Zapruder film. This forum also showed other women's heads turning and it pointed out some witnesses hands moving as they clapped." Mr. Peters, The site you mentioned looks like an interesting one. Could you share it's name/address? I'd like to check it out. Thanx.

Hi, Harry - I was attempting to convey my agreement with you regarding the seriousness of our present situation as a direct result of what occurred on 11/22/63 - and all that has transpired since - the bell which you consistently toll. p.s. 8^) is just a more elaborate "smiley face". p.s.s. "Church of What's Happening, Now!" - was a funny bit Flip Wilson used to do in the late 60's, I think - a very groovy and funky preacher...

Harry - You remind me of John the Baptist - from "The Church of What's Happening, Now!"... 8^)

Just wanted to say that in Mark Lane's comments - the transcription reads that he calls the entire TSBD-knoll area "hollowed grown". He must have said "hallowed ground" - a much more powerful and cogent description... although, a case could be made for a "hollow groan"...

His bent was definitely towards landscape and architectural presentations - and I don't particuarly read that much into it. To each his own, I guess. Annie Liebowitz (sp?) did almost all portraits - Ansel Adams - not too many - I don't think. Lee Oswald did sometimes photograph large masses of citizens as an element of a more expansive depiction - in fact, considering how few photos survive - at least several show a sort of "bee hive" approach to the people in the city. You may have something, though - about an overall fear of people or a distancing from them - not trusting. Perhaps it does have alot to do with his style. His early years may have imprinted him pretty dramatically.

I puzzled over LEE HARVEY OSWALD this past weekend. It seems to be a sort of "Bible Code" unto itself. HOLD WEAVES EARLY HEAVY DEAL LOWERS A LEWD YALE HOVERS WHOLE SLAVE READY SLAVE WHORE LAYED A WHOLLY SEVERE AD WHOSE DAVE REALLY? DEALEY WAR SHOVEL HEY, DEALS LOVE WAR! YALE HEAVES WORLD LEE WAS OVERLY HAD HE SAY A LEVEL WORD SEVERAL DELAY HOW LOW HEAVY LEADERS HAD EVERY LAW LOSE HEARSAY LOVE WELD SLAY WHOEVER DEAL HOW'D SLAYER LEAVE? SOLVE LEE HARD WAY SEW HEAD OVER ALLY SOW A LEVEL YARD, EH? WHO LEE YARD SLAVE? HEADY SLOW REVEAL HELL WOVE SAD YEAR DAY SHALL EVER OWE WHO REALLY EVADES? REAL SLY WHO EVADE WHOSE DEAR VALLEY? YEAH, WORLD LEAVES WE SOLD REAL HEAVY Pretty astonishing, really...

Mr. Adams, The guidelines are not too restrictive - I hope you will continue to post your views as I have personally always found your research and revelations to be important stuff - examining areas which seem to be ignored by many but are very relevant. I seem to recall reading that Bell Helicopter (owned by Howard Hughes?) was in great financial difficulty (verge of bankruptcy?) at the beginning of Vietnam - but that Bell copters were used extensively throughout the war and by it's end - Hughes had accrued another tremendous fortune...

PHOTOS REMOVED TO RECAPTURE SPACE Thomas, Sorry for the delay - I only just saw this. Here are some examples of Lee's work - found, I believe in the DPD archives. They have been adjusted to be viewed as the DPD presentations are pretty inadaquate.

Evenstill, Ferrie said that they had actually not gotten any geese - because they had discovered that they had NOTHING TO SHOOT THEM WITH. AFTER he had already stated that a couple of the boys had gotten geese. There's a big difference between the recollections of actually having multiple dead geese and then, dealing with the distinctive realities associated (sights, smells, sounds, physical interactions, weight, mass, blood... they all traveled in the same car...) - and, the thoroughly empty - vaccuous - "non-experience" - of never having had any dead geese to remember to begin with. He sounds like a bald-faced xxxx to me - spewing nothing but "hooey" - irregardless of the types of weapons which they had all apparently forgotten to bring on their hunting trip.

I love that story about driving to Houston late at night during the severe thunderstorm to go ice-skating. Then, he says, the next morning they all went goose hunting. Then he says "a couple of the "boys" killed some geese - but he didn't. When informed that "the boys" had testified that they took no rifles - he remembers that they had driven all the way out to where the geese were - and realized that they had forgotten to bring their rifles - so, no, they didn't kill any geese. What a load of crap.

I believe Cheney stated publicly before the elections that it was the White House's #1 priority to remove Wellstone from the Senate. It's too, too curious that Minnesota elected the Senate's "most left wing member" and then returned him to office by an even wider margin in 1996 - and, then replaced him with the GOP's fastest rising star - Norm Coleman - who has already been appointed to many highly important committees in his first 3 years - garnering precious national "face-time" and applying his subtle right-wing guidence and pressure to the debates. He helped craft the legislation for the new National Intelligence Director and sat on the panel with the Senate 9/11 investigators. He is the Chairman of Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, Chairman of the Subcommittee on Western Hemisphere, Peace Corps, and Narcotics Affairs, sits on the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, the Foreign Relations Committee, the Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship, and the Committee on Agriculture, Forestry and Nutition. This seems an amazing level of involvement and responsibility for such a junior member in his first thousand days. By electing Coleman, they changed course and rejected a favorite son, national Minnesota icon ex-Vice President with similar views to Wellstone and long-time statewide recognition and respect. Instead, they choose a right-winger - born in Brooklyn - only arrived in Minnesota in the early 90's? What were the poll numbers before the election? Would the electorate really reject Wellstone so conclusively after he had died in such suspicious circumstances with his young family and friends? There was a vicious media attack on his funeral - that it was a thinly veiled political rally. I'm sure that his friends and supporters shared his extremely liberal views and it was probably what bonded them throughout their lives. It was who he was and represented his greatest and most noble pursuits and accomplishments. The right-wing media is not welcome at such gatherings - with their attempts to skew and subvert the meaning and interpretation of such a gathering. The bigger issue is that of forcibly directing the course of American policy and political discussion through brute strength and immoral killings - the stealing of elections in the U.S. - and the scrupulous examination of the convergence of all the strategies that successfully perpetrate them. "Dr. Franklin... what do we have?" "A republic, my good woman... if you can KEEP it..."

Is it correct that JFK loyalists stayed gathered around his casket for the entire flight - only going to the front of the plane for a 5-minute swearing in? That took place before the plane took-off? I was under the impression that the spaces were rather confined and not conducive to clandestine "shenanigans" with so many aboard. Was that casket empty when it was carried on? There must be a theory that JFK's corpse was flown in a separate plane back to Washington. Did the Bethesda autopsy begin immediately upon their arrival back to D.C. - or, was there any sort of delay or "missing time"? Sorry, this period of time always confuses me.

Perhaps the filming could coincide with the annual Dallas commemoration when many researchers might already be in attendence. I'm sure many of us believe that something extremely powerful could be created - and, if done to high standards - possibly submitted at Cannes and Sundance, etc. - reaching sizable audiences and garnering some interesting press coverage. There are so many deceptions, flaws, holes and discrepancies - the discussion deserves to be kept alive. The original ideals and principles which supposedly founded this nation demand it. "Coup me once - shame on you. Coup me twice - shame on me."

I had an idea several years ago of everyone collaborating on a "documentary" - which would appear to be something of a "trade show" (replete with small wandering crowds of inquisitive citizens) - with various researchers manning "booths" and within a small frame of time would present their new evidence and theories which have come forth over the last decades which the general public may not necessarily be aware of. The "crowd" would move from presentation to presentation. Only the best and most powerfully revealing info would "make the cut". At the time, the question of funding came up - and that seemed to quell the discussion.

I am sure that I was watching coverage which repeated the British Enfield 303 story, even before the Mauser turned Carcano. That early misreporting fundamentally changed me and the way I perceived the world. For the first time, I began to consider sinister possibilities behind what could be a facade of deceit. Before that, I was just a completely patriotic American boy - hardly questioning much of anything. I think people who lived through that weekend retain an uncomfortable "sense" of what it was they experienced - like an internal, personal "time-stamp" which they will never really relinquish - no matter how many tomes of gobbledy-gook they are bombarded with. It's something they truly own. Conclusions arrived at from their own perceptions and the sifted analyses of what they experienced and interpreted so deeply for themselves. I doubt the perpetrators and their progeny have much concern about what is perceived to be true or not true - as long as an amoeba of muddled confusion keeps everyone silent and ineffective until the world of actual witnesses and participants dies away. This case always reminds me of what Chico Marx exclaimed in "Duck Soup" - "WHO are you gonna BELIEVE!?!? ME... or your OWN EYES!?!?" Excuse me if I have wandered off-topic. Where's my nurse? NURSE!!! Come quickly... I'm in a very old Marx Brothers movie... By the way, in an effort to contribute to the actual thread title - I have been completely discouraged in attempts to pursue information at official websites purporting to provide research materials to the public. The pathways to obtain data seem so convoluted and incomprehensible - with so many different designations of letters and numbers for the same pieces of evidence from so many "official sources". If it was a truly sincere effort - it seems it could have been so much simpler and straightforward - not such an obstacle.

Re; The John Birch Society. Not unlike Castro's statement{s} to his Revolutionary Army not long after it's January I, 1959 success, " The 26th of July Movement must Wither Away and become a political government" {of Cuba}. The John Birch Society did also Wither Away and became a political government {of the U.S. after 1963}. Harry So succinct... yet, so gargantuan in it's implications. Yo, Harry... Defending America... we've muffed it good... I think I've heard BOTH shoes drop - now, the actual appendages are falling...

I remember hearing that someone began massaging Oswald's chest as though he'd had a heart attack - actually forcing more blood out the stomach wound. Has anyone ever heard this?

Castro was actually in the middle of an interview being conducted by a reporter from The New Republic when he was first notified of the assassination. His reactions, comments and the details of what transpired appeared in an article on December 7, 1963. I find it very interesting and enlightening - and, believable. I find it improbable that any plotter would put himself in this position of being scrupulously examined by the media in the exact moments in which his dasterdly deed was unfolding. That would seem like a huge scheduling conflict if you were the boss and could have it any way you pleased. Who would need the aggravation? He comes off too naturally. Why would anyone want to do that much "acting" at such a time. Some will say, "That's part of his alibi!" I don't buy it. To each, his own. "...Personally, I consider him responsible for everything, but I will say this: he has come to understand many things over the past few months; and then too, in the last analysis, I'm convinced that anyone else would be worse.." Then Fidel had added with a broad and boyish grin: "If you see him again, you can tell him that I'm willing to declare Goldwater my friend if that will guarantee Kennedy's re-election!" When Castro Heard the News By Jean Daniel The New Republic, 7 December 1963, pp. 7–9 Havana It was around 1:30 in the afternoon, Cuban time. We were having lunch in the living room of the modest summer residence which Fidel Castro owns on magnificent Varadero Beach, 120 kilometers from Havana. For at least the tenth time. I was questioning the Cuban leader on details of the negotiations with Russia before the missile installations last year. The telephone rang, a secretary in guerrilla garb announced that Mr. Dorticós, President of the Cuban Republic, had an urgent communication for the Prime Minister. Fidel picked up the phone and I heard him say: "Como? Un atentado?" ("What's that? An attempted assassination?") He then turned to us to say that Kennedy had just been struck down in Dallas. Then he went back to the telephone and exclaimed in a loud voice "Herido? Muy gravemente?" ("Wounded? Very seriously?") He came back, sat down, and repeated three times the words: "Es una mala noticia." ("This is bad news.") He remained silent for a moment, awaiting another call with further news. He remarked while we waited that there was an alarmingly sizable lunatic fringe in American society and that this deed could equally well have been the work of a madman or a terrorist. Perhaps a Vietnamese? Or a member of the Ku Klux Klan? The second call came through: it was hoped they would be able to announce that the United States President was still alive, that there was hope of saving him. Fidel Castro's immediate reaction was: "If they can, he is already re-elected." He pronounced these words with satisfaction. This sentence was a sequel to a conversation we had held on a previous evening and which had turned into an all-night session. To be precise, it lasted from 10 in the evening until 4 in the morning. A good part of the talk revolved about the impressions I recounted to him of an interview which President Kennedy granted me this last October 24, and about Fidel Castro's reactions to these impressions. During this nocturnal discussion, Castro had delivered himself of a relentless indictment of US policy, adding that in the recent past Washington had had ample opportunity to normalize its relations with Cuba, but that instead he had tolerated a CIA program of training, equipping and organizing a counter-revolution. He had told me that he wasn't in the least fearful of his life, since danger was his natural milieu, and if he were to become a victim of the United States this would simply enhance his radius of influence in Latin America as well as throughout the socialist world. He was speaking, he said, from the viewpoint of the interests of peace in both the American continents. To achieve this goal, a leader would have to arise in the United States capable of understanding the explosive realities of Latin America and of meeting them halfway. Then, suddenly, he had taken a less hostile tack: "Kennedy could still be this man. He still has the possibility of becoming, in the eyes of history, the greatest President of the United States, the leader who may at last understand that there can be coexistence between capitalists and socialists, even in the Americas. He would then be an even greater President than Lincoln. I know, for example, that for Khrushchev, Kennedy is a man you can talk with. I have gotten this impression from all my conversations with Khrushchev. Other leaders have assured me that to attain this goal, we must first await his re-election. Personally, I consider him responsible for everything, but I will say this: he has come to understand many things over the past few months; and then too, in the last analysis, I'm convinced that anyone else would be worse.." Then Fidel had added with a broad and boyish grin: "If you see him again, you can tell him that I'm willing to declare Goldwater my friend if that will guarantee Kennedy's re-election!" This conversation was held on November 19. Now it was nearly 2 o'clock and we got up from the table and settled ourselves in front of a radio. Commandant Vallero, his physician, aide-de-camp, and intimate friend, was easily able to get the broadcasts from the NBC network in Miami. As the news came in, Vallero would translate it for Fidel: Kennedy wounded in the head; pursuit of the assassin; murder of a policeman; finally the fatal announcement: President Kennedy is dead. Then Fidel stood up and said to me: "Everything is changed. Everything is going to change. The United States occupies such a position in world affairs that the death of a President of that country affects millions of people in every corner of the globe. The cold war, relations with Russia, Latin America, Cuba, the Negro question…all will have to be rethought. I'll tell you one thing: at least Kennedy was an enemy to whom we had become accustomed. This is a serious matter, an extremely serious matter." After this quarter-hour of silence observed by all the American radio stations, we once more tuned in on Miami; the silence had only been broken by a rebroadcasting of the American national anthem. Strange indeed was the impression made, on hearing this hymn ring out in the house of Fidel Castro, in the midst of a circle of worried faces. "Now," Fidel said, "they will have to find the assassin quickly, but very quickly, otherwise, you watch and see, I know them, they will try to put the blame on us for this thing. But tell me, how many Presidents have been assassinated? Four? This is most disturbing! In Cuba, only one has been assassinated. You know, when we were hiding out in the Sierra there were some (not in my group, in another) who wanted to kill Batista. They thought they could do away with a regime by decapitating it. I have always been violently opposed to such methods. First of all from the viewpoint of political self-interest, because so far as Cuba is concerned, if Batista had been killed he would have been replaced by some military figure who would have tried to make the revolutionists pay for the martyrdom of the dictator. But I was also opposed to it on personal grounds; assassination is repellant to me." The broadcasts were now resumed. One reporter felt he should mention the difficulty Mrs. Kennedy was having in getting rid of her bloodstained stockings. Fidel exploded: "What sort of a mind is this!" He repeated the remark several times: "What sort of a mind is this? There is a difference in our civilizations after all. Are you like this in Europe? For us Latin Americans, death is a sacred matter; not only does it mark the close of hostilities, but it also imposes decency, dignity, respect. There are even street urchins who behave like kings in the face of death. Incidentally, this reminds me of something else: if you write all those things I told you yesterday against Kennedy's policy, don't use his name now; speak instead of the policy of the United States government." Toward 5 o'clock, Fidel Castro declared that since there was nothing we could do to alter the tragedy, we must try to put our time to good use in spite of it. He wanted to accompany me in person on a visit to a granja de pueblo (state farm), where he had been engaging in some experiments. His present obsession is agriculture. He reads nothing but agronomical studies and reports. He dwells lyrically on the soil, fertilizers, and the possibilities which will give Cuba enough sugar cane by 1970 to achieve economic independence. "Didn't I Tell You" We went by car, with the radio on. The Dallas police were now hot on the trail of the assassin. He is a Russian spy, says the news commentator. Five minutes later, correction: he is a spy married to a Russian. Fidel said: "There, didn't I tell you; it'll be my turn next." But not yet. The next word was: the assassin is a Marxist deserter. Then the word came through, in effect, that the assassin was a young man who was a member of the "Fair Play for Cuba Committee," that he was an admirer of Fidel Castro. Fidel declared: "If they had had proof, they would have said he was an agent, a hired killer. In saying simply that he is an admirer, this is just to try and make an association in people's minds between the name of Castro and the emotion awakened by the assassination. This is a publicity method, a propaganda device. It's terrible. But you know, I'm sure this will all soon blow over. There are too many competing policies in the United States for any single one to be able to impose itself universally for very long." We arrived at the granja de pueblo, where the farmers welcomed Fidel. At that very moment, a speaker announced over the radio that it was now known that the assassin is a "pro-Castro Marxist." One commentator followed another; the remarks became increasingly emotional, increasingly aggressive. Fidel then excused himself: "We shall have to give up the visit to the farm." We went on toward Matanzas from where he could telephone President Dorticós. On the way he had questions: "Who is Lyndon Johnson? What is his reputation? What were his relations with Kennedy? With Khrushchev? What was his position at the time of the attempted invasion of Cuba?" Finally and most important of all: "What authority does he exercise over the CIA?" Then abruptly he looked at his watch, saw that it would be half an hour before we reached Matanzas and, practically on the spot, he dropped off to sleep. After Matanzas, where he must have decreed a state of alert, we returned to Vardero for dinner. Quoting the words spoken to him by a woman shortly before, he said to me that it was an irony of history for the Cubans, in the situation to which they had been reduced by the blockade, to have to mourn the death of a President of the United States. "After all," he added, "there are perhaps some people in the world to whom this news is cause for rejoicing. The South Vietnamese guerrillas, for example, and also, I would imagine, Madame Nhu!" I thought of the people of Cuba, accustomed to the sight of posters like the one depicting the Red Army with Maquis superimposed in front, and the screaming captions "HALT, MR. KENNEDY! CUBA IS NOT ALONE…." I thought of all those who had been led to associate their deprivations with the policies of President John F. Kennedy. At dinner I was able to take up all my questions. What had motivated Castro to endanger the peace of the world with the missiles in Cuba? How dependent was Cuba on the Soviet Union? Is it not possible to envisage relations between Cuba and the United Sates along the same lines as those between Finland and the Russians? How was the transition made from the humanism of Sierra Maestra to the Marxism-Leninism of 1961? Fidel Castro, once more in top form, had an explanation for everything. Then he questioned me once more on Kennedy, and each time I eulogized the intellectual qualities of the assassinated President, I awakened the keenest interest in him. The Cubans have lived with the United States in that cruel intimacy so familiar to me of the colonized with their colonizers. Nevertheless, it was an intimacy. In that very seductive city of Havana to which we returned in the evening, where the luminous signboards with Marxist slogans have replaced the Coca Cola and toothpaste billboards, in the midst of Soviet exhibits and Czechoslovakian trucks, a certain American emotion vibrated in the atmosphere, compounded of resentment, of concern, of anxiety, yet also, in spite of everything, of a mysterious almost imperceptible rapprochement. After all, this American President was able to reach accord with our Russian friends during his lifetime, said a young Cuban intellectual to me as I was taking my leave. It was almost as though he were apologizing for not rejoicing at the assassination. Jean Daniel

I, for one, do. I have read Harry's description of a major address given by one of the heads of the Society shortly after the murders - where he alludes to something akin to "that great bloody turn of history" (or, somesuch) - and he proudly assures his audience that the JBS had played it's part in achieving those results. Maybe Harry could provide something a bit more specific.

The probable subject of a novel rather than it's author - hardly anyone fills the bill as one of the potential architects better than Edward Lansdale - who seems to have been devoted to the devising of the most bizarre, incomprehensible covert plots and operations throughout his entire career. It was such a huge and energetic enterprise though - it seems like it began to unravel at almost all of it's fringes and edges soon after it had taken place. Only our willingness to accept so many changes, alterations, alibis and excuses in the retelling of the story allowed them to succeed. In it's raw state - it was riddled with glaring inconsistencies and mistakes. Far from any kind of perfect murder, it was a sinister contraption continuously patched together as it limped along on the road to the future.